This is the hotel where King Crimson broke up in 1969. More accurately, where Ian & Michael decided to leave. Not a good omen for the band meeting on our arrival here, Sunday. So, on Sunday evening, we had a formal group meeting with David Singleton who flew in specifically to meet with the group.
Group meetings are always awful. They provide the opportunity for members to air their grievances, vent their negative concerns with the band's business, express their frustrations & draw attention to all that is wrong with the group's life & activities. Of which, may I say, there are always plentiful examples. No decisions of value are taken. The important decisions are usually taken one on one, bumping into each other in coffee shops, getting in or out of a van. Discussed informally, a consensus emerges, is agreed & accepted.
The aim of this particular meeting was to open discussions on the future the group wish for themselves. My own view is that, for the first time, this particular group of people are able to make choices & decisions for the first time. This is connected to process: once a wagon is rolling, it develops its own momentum & internal necessities. There are few places in any process where one can intervene profitably, take action to keep the process on course & complete it without something being lost. At this particular point, at this particular time, this incarnation of Crimson has the opportunity to take decisions regarding its possible futures.
One concern has to do with the public presentation of Crimson. If RF does the interviews, the group continues to be presented & represented as the crusty old progressive rock outfit worthy / unworthy of veneration. "Prog rock pond scum set to bum you out" as the LA Reader had it when we played here in 1995. If RF doesn't do interviews, then the "group" is seen as being unwilling to promote itself. That is, RF is presented with a double bind.
Another concern (mine) has to do with Crimson getting out of the Crimson Ghetto. Or as Adrian has it, the Crimson plateau. Essentially, do we wish to embrace a creative future (the top line) or the bottom line, which is the conventional pattern of Crim returning to active service every few years? Both are valid. And what about the opportunities in between?
Another concern (Pat) has to do with the publicity & promotion for this tour & album. Why hasn't DGM done more to promote the shows & follow up with reviews? The answers to this are simple: firstly, it's a Virgin tour (TCOL); and, secondly, no one pays DGM to promote & publicise. This is a part of DGM getting inexorably pushed by its artists into being an old-fashioned record company, although the royalty structure is based on DGM being a distribution company. That is, for the $1 DGM receives on each record sold, $1 is spent to pay the office bills & staff wages. That is, all the wages except David Singleton (who is grossly underpaid) & RF, who isn't paid at all (actually, on one occasion) although he holds a large debt from setting up the company.
All this and more from the King Crimson group meeting.
But what of the KC show last night, at The House of Blues? I felt it was awful, but why? Did the set list restrict the show's process? A continual series of small mistakes cumulatively unseated its unfolding. We recovered the flow to a degree during the encores - perhaps 90% says Pat. David felt London was a better show, but suggests the bar is getting higher for what is accepted as a norm for this Crim.
"Conscience is utterly impersonal."
